Educational Leadership Scholarship Research Articles

Meetings: school leadership infrastructure that creates sense

ABSTRACT Staff meetings and central office meetings of the school principal or principal meetings are noted across literature, considered necessary and occasionally frustrating, and yet they remain a relatively overlooked phenomenon in educational leadership scholarship. The question guiding this article is: Are principal meetings necessary and, if so, what purpose(s) do they serve? To answer this question, principal meetings are conceptualized as interconnected sensemaking episodes to analyze evidence from a five-month mini-ethnographic case study of the meetings of two elementary school principals in India. Findings show that principal meetings are necessary for providing focus and coherence to the performance of administrative responsibilities. Findings shed light on how elements such as ambiguity-clarification and task-repetitions may be a doubled-edged sword that makes meetings effective but also contributes to frustration and boredom. Principal meetings highlight that leadership effectiveness must be tied to the context and physical presence shapes meaning-making. Principal meetings are non-trivial sensemaking nodes of leadership infrastructure encouraging reciprocity in thought but may also create a reality that prioritizes administration over instructional improvement. Implications include considering meetings less as tools in need of improvement and more as conceptual and analytical phenomena to study and nuance educational leadership practice.

Is educational leadership (still) worth studying? An epistemic worthiness-informed analysis

This article is exploratory and experimental. It starts from the premise that leadership scholarship is a site of disagreement, where mainstream claims are challenged by critical scholars. Some criticism focuses on conceptual clarity, and incorporates consideration of who should be categorised as a leader, and on what basis, and whether it is helpful to refer to ‘leaders’ and ‘followers’. The ‘new wave’ of critical leadership studies generates controversial questions relating to whether leadership exists or is in fact a myth that we have reified. The bulk of criticism directed at educational leadership challenges three mainstream knowledge claims – underpinned by what I call the causality belief, the leadership dependency belief, and the conceptual belief – and which are the focus of this article's analysis. While criticism of these knowledge claims is well-rehearsed, the article breaks new ground by analysing them through an epistemic justification lens to address the question: is educational leadership (still) worth studying? Represented by these three component beliefs, the mainstream educational leadership scholarship belief system is analysed within a frame derived from the philosophy of science, and draws on BonJour's coherentist theory of epistemic justification to apply a more structured assessment than has hitherto been achieved by critical scholarship.

Is leadership a myth? A ‘new wave’ critical leadership-focused research agenda for recontouring the landscape of educational leadership

Intentionally provocative, this article identifies weaknesses in mainstream educational leadership scholarship, and draws upon ‘new wave’ critical leadership studies to propose a new, potentially paradigm-shifting, direction for the field. The central argument is that educational leadership researchers, in focusing predominantly on how institutional heads and other formal ‘leaders’ may best ‘do’ leadership, are addressing the wrong questions and setting off from the wrong departure point. The unit of analysis should shift, it is argued, from leadership to influence, within a new research agenda that replaces surface-level, causality-assumptive ‘how?’ and ‘why?’ questions that have shaped mainstream educational leadership research for over thirty years, with more fundamental ‘who? and ‘what?’ questions, aimed at identifying who is in fact doing the influencing. An aspect of such inquiry is leadership scepticism and agnosticism, which confronts the question: Does leadership exist, or is it a myth that we have reified? A highly original feature of the proposed new research agenda is the adoption of the author's theoretical notion of a singular unit of micro-level influence as an ‘epistemic object’ – a concept derived from STEMM research, denoting a vague and undefined potential focus of inquiry that may (or may not) turn out to be significant.

Educational leaders and the professional doctorate dissertation: an analysis of leaders’ interests within the educational leadership corpus

ABSTRACT Educational leadership scholarship, research on school individuals at the helm of achieving school goals, is well documented. However, less is known regarding educational leaders’ research in professional doctorate programmes, where practice may influence scholarship. This study sought to add to professional doctorate research by using directed qualitative content analysis guided by educational administration schools of thought described in a review of the literature to uncover educational leaders’ interests and concerns through an examination of 101 professional doctorate dissertations completed between 2013 and 2019. Of the 101 dissertations analysed, 88 aligned with the educational administration corpus. Educational leaders focused the majority of their research on school improvement and school effectiveness (65.9%), while leading teachers (5.7%) was of less concern. This result suggests that educational leaders with the agency or power to implement the findings from their doctoral dissertation may consider research in school improvement and school effectiveness as the most critical education administration school of research. Results from this study could be used by other educational leadership programmes to determine the prevalence of education administration research, examine the role of practice in research completed, and to broaden the scope of leaders’ research.

All We Need Is One Mic: A Call for Anti-racist Solidarity to Deconstruct Anti-Black Racism in Educational Leadership

In this article, we outline some of the vital measurements of racism and anti-blackness as a macro system in education. We contend that principal preparation programs have not explicitly prioritized anti-racist school leadership, while often resisting the possibilities of solidarity or one mic of knowledge to increase anti-racist dispositions. Considering the lexicon of whiteness as an assemblage, a racial discourse should be “supported by material practices and institutions,” that prepare educational leaders to examine anti-blackness curriculum that have been embedded as a standard method. We also posit that theoretical understanding of racism as global whiteness from a post-oppositional lens and decoloniality that will challenge the way racism is currently referenced in educational leadership scholarship. Moreover, current global and decolonial research gives way for a new vision of solidarity by humanizing scholarly resistance that cultivates a vision of community that regards differences of knowledge across groups and investigates racist policies and practices in educational leadership programs.

Review of Teaching Educational Leadership in Muslim Countries: Theoretical, Historical and Cultural Foundations

Samier and ElKaleh’s (2019) book titled Teaching Educational Leadership in Muslim Countries: Theoretical, Historical and Cultural Foundations is part of the series of Educational Leadership Theory books, which address trends in educational leadership scholarship and aim to “deliver an innovative and provocative dialogue whose coherence comes not from the adoption of a single paradigmatic lens but rather in an engagement with the theoretical and methodological preliminaries of scholarship” (Eacott & Niesche, 2019, p. v). Samier and ElKaleh (2019) present “what it means to teach educational administration and leadership in a Muslim context” (p. ix) through theory, current controversies, and case studies.

Theory Amid Policy and Practice: A Typology of Theory Use in Educational Leadership Scholarship

In the field of educational leadership, there is some work around the preferred theories of scholars, but little to no research on how the chosen theories are subsequently applied. Better understanding the purpose, role, and depth of how theory is used in educational leadership can help inform the teaching and mentorship of aspiring leaders and scholars. To examine the nature of theory use in educational leadership, we applied Dressman’s typology of theory use in literacy (2007), to 47 policy and practice-oriented articles in Educational Administration Quarterly. We found similar patterns to Dressman’s typology, but also important differences. Implications are discussed.

Critical perspectives in educational leadership: a new ‘theory turn’?

ABSTRACTIn this article, I argue that we are witnessing a new phase or ‘theory turn’ in the field of educational leadership. These more critical perspectives in the field of educational leadership have typically been marginalised by the larger body of orthodox approaches due to a perceived lack of focus on best practice and ‘what works’ discourses, and especially in recent years with the rise of the school effectiveness and improvement movement. However, critical perspectives in educational leadership constitute an essential and vibrant part of educational leadership scholarship and discourse. Drawing on Michel Foucault's notion of discourse, through this article, I examine how critical perspectives have been constituted historically, with some of the main themes of research. This foregrounding also highlights a number of limitations with more orthodox and hegemonic leadership discourses. I identify a number of key writers in the field and situate them in the current theory turn, that is, an emphasis of theoretically informed research that have been prolific over the last 5–10 years.

Qualitative research and educational leadership

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to highlight issues relayed to appropriate design and conduct of qualitative studies in educational leadership. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is a conceptual/logical argument that centers around the notion that while scholars in the field have at times paid attention to such dynamics, it is important that issues special to the field are considered by all. Findings – The major findings indicate that researchers/analysts need to determine not only the existence and accessibility of the qualitative research design and its various data collection strategies for leadership studies but also its authenticity and usefulness, taking into account the original purpose, the context in which it is produced and the intended audience. Originality/value – Certain aspects of the paper relate to general issues of sound and generally accepted standards of research practice, but the authors also consider several issues that make educational leadership scholarship unique. The originality of the paper draws attention to certain dynamics that scholars should consider when designing and conducting qualitative research on educational leadership. In doing so, the authors not only draw on the literature but also on their own experience designing, conducting and publishing qualitative research on educational leadership.

Good intentions are not enough: a critical examination of diversity and educational leadership scholarship

An emergent strand within mainstream educational leadership scholarship is an engagement with notions of diversity. This is part of a belated recognition that in an increasingly globalising world the largely masculinist, white norms from which most accounts of leadership derive, lack sufficient explanatory power for educational systems. Utilising critical, black and Indigenous feminist work on the recognition of difference, as well as recent feminist scholarship deconstructing diversity discourses in educational leadership, this article outlines the origins of the key diversity discourses from which the educational leadership field draws. It then analyses recent articles on diversity and educational administration, noting how the various diversity discourses have been taken up and the subsequent implications for educational leadership theorising and practices. It concludes by arguing that critical feminist research about the politics of difference, amongst others, provides an important body of scholarship from which to develop self‐reflexive and nuanced engagements with notions of diversity and leadership.

Women Administrators Negotiate Work-Family Conflicts in Changing Times: An Intergenerational Perspective

Background: Concerns about work-family conflicts are becoming an increasing problem for women administrators. Yet these concerns have been overshadowed in the educational leadership scholarship, which has focused on barriers related to discrimination in hiring and promotion and lack of sponsoring and mentoring. Purpose: To illuminate differences and commonalities in how women administrators from different generations and racial/ethnic identities negotiate work-family conflicts. Research Methodology: A qualitative life course design was employed in this intergenerational study of 31 Black and White women administrators. Main Findings: The participants’ efforts to enact the multiple and competing roles of administrator, wife, mother, and caretaker proved to be conflicting across generation and race/ethnicity, especially for women born after the civil rights and women’s movements, who confronted a strikingly different gender context than did their older counterparts. To reconcile these conflicts, the participants employed various life course strategies that were distinguished by their unique generational locations and racial/ethnic identities. For example, women in the “older” generation were compelled to prioritize family above professional pursuits more so than women in the “younger” generation. With respect to race/ethnicity, Black administrators relied on extended women kinship ties for child care and household support whereas White administrators primarily sought spousal support. Implications for Research and Policy: Further investigation is needed on the work-family conflicts confronting contemporary women and men administrators. From a policy perspective, there is an urgent need for more employer-supported child and elder care, flexible scheduling, and family-leave policies.